Problem-Specific Guides Series Problem-Oriented Guides for Police No. 11 Shoplifting 2nd Edition

Ronald V. Clarke Gohar Petrossian

Problem-Oriented Guides for Police Problem-Specific Guides Series No. 11

Shoplifting 2nd Edition Ronald V. Clarke and Gohar Petrossian

This project was supported by Cooperative Agreement #2010-CK-WX-K005 awarded by the Office of Community Oriented Policing Services, U.S. Department of Justice. The opinions contained herein are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily represent the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice. References to specific agencies, companies, products, or services should not be considered an endorsement of the product by the author(s) or the U.S. Department of Justice. Rather, the references are illustrations to supplement discussion of the issues. The Internet references cited in this publication were valid as of the date of this publication. Given that URLs and websites are in constant flux, neither the author(s) nor the COPS Office can vouch for their current validity. © 2013 Center for Problem-Oriented Policing, Inc. The U.S. Department of Justice reserves a royalty-free, nonexclusive, and irrevocable license to reproduce, publish, or otherwise use, and authorize others to use, this publication for Federal Government purposes. This publication may be freely distributed and used for noncommercial and educational purposes. www.cops.usdoj.gov ISBN: 978-1-932582-34-5 April 2013

Contents

Contents

About the Problem-Specific Guides Series...... 1 Acknowledgments...... 5 The Problem of Shoplifting...... 7 What This Guide Does and Does Not Cover...... 7 General Description of the Problem...... 8 Main Offender Groups ...... 8 Harms Caused by Shoplifting...... 10 Factors Contributing to Shoplifting ...... 11 Goods Sold ...... 11 Seasonal and Temporal Patterns ...... 13 Location ...... 13 Retail Policies, Staffing, and Stock Control...... 13 Store Layout and Displays...... 14 The Internet...... 15 Understanding Your Local Problem ...... 17 Stakeholders...... 18 Asking the Right Questions ...... 18 Incidents ...... 18 Offenders...... 19 Locations/Times...... 19 Conditions Facilitating Shoplifting...... 20 Current Responses...... 20 Measuring Your Effectiveness...... 21 Responses to the Problem of Shoplifting...... 23 General Considerations for an Effective Response Strategy ...... 23 Specific Responses to Reduce Shoplifting...... 25 For All Shoplifting ...... 25 For Organized Shoplifting...... 33 Responses with Limited Effectiveness...... 35 Appendix: Summary of Responses to Shoplifting ...... 37 References...... 43 Endnotes...... 47 About the Authors...... 49 Other Problem-Oriented Guides for Police...... 51

About the Problem-Specific Guides Series

About the Problem-Specific Guides Series The Problem-Specific Guides summarize knowledge about how police can reduce the harm caused by specific crime and disorder problems. They are guides to prevention and to improving the overall response to incidents, not to investigating offenses or handling specific incidents. Neither do they cover all of the technical details about how to implement specific responses. The guides are written for police—of whatever rank or assignment— who must address the specific problem the guides cover. The guides will be most useful to officers who: • Understand basic problem-oriented policing principles and methods. The guides are not primers in problem-oriented policing. They deal only briefly with the initial decision to focus on a particular problem, methods to analyze the problem, and means to assess the results of a problem-oriented policing project. They are designed to help police decide how best to analyze and address a problem they have already identified. (A companion series of Problem-Solving Tools guides has been produced to aid in various aspects of problem analysis and assessment.) • Can look at a problem in depth. Depending on the complexity of the problem, you should be prepared to spend perhaps weeks, or even months, analyzing and responding to it. Carefully studying a problem before responding helps you design the right strategy, one that is most likely to work in your community. You should not blindly adopt the responses others have used; you must decide whether they are appropriate to your local situation. What is true in one place may not be true elsewhere; what works in one place may not work everywhere. • Are willing to consider new ways of doing police business. The guides describe responses that other police departments have used or that researchers have tested. While not all of these responses will be appropriate to your particular problem, they should help give a broader view of the kinds of things you could do. You may think you cannot implement some of these responses in your jurisdiction, but perhaps you can. In many places, when police have discovered a more effective response, they have succeeded in having laws and policies changed, improving the response to the problem. (A companion series of Response Guides has been produced to help you understand how commonly-used police responses work on a variety of problems.)

| 1 | Shoplifting, 2nd Edition

• Understand the value and the limits of research knowledge. For some types of problems, a lot of useful research is available to the police; for other problems, little is available. Accordingly, some guides in this series summarize existing research whereas other guides illustrate the need for more research on that particular problem. Regardless, research has not provided definitive answers to all the questions you might have about the problem. The research may help get you started in designing your own responses, but it cannot tell you exactly what to do. This will depend greatly on the particular nature of your local problem. In the interest of keeping the guides readable, not every piece of relevant research has been cited, nor has every point been attributed to its sources. To have done so would have overwhelmed and distracted the reader. The references listed at the end of each guide are those drawn on most heavily; they are not a complete bibliography of research on the subject. • Are willing to work with others to find effective solutions to the problem. The police alone cannot implement many of the responses discussed in the guides. They must frequently implement them in partnership with other responsible private and public bodies, including other government agencies, non-governmental organizations, private businesses, public utilities, community groups, and individual citizens. An effective problem-solver must know how to forge genuine partnerships with others and be prepared to invest considerable effort in making these partnerships work. Each guide identifies particular individuals or groups in the community with whom police might work to improve the overall response to that problem. Thorough analysis of problems often reveals that individuals and groups other than the police are in a stronger position to address problems and that police ought to shift some greater responsibility to them to do so. Response Guide No. 3, Shifting and Sharing Responsibility for Public Safety Problems, provides further discussion of this topic. The COPS Office defines community policing as “a philosophy that promotes organizational strategies, which support the systematic use of partnerships and problem- solving techniques, to proactively address the immediate conditions that give rise to public safety issues such as crime, social disorder, and fear of crime.” These guides emphasize problem-solving and police-community partnerships in the context of addressing specific public safety problems. For the most part, the organizational strategies that can facilitate problem-solving and police-community partnerships vary considerably and discussion of them is beyond the scope of these guides.

| 2 | About the Problem-Specific Guides Series

These guides have drawn on research findings and police practices in the United States, the United Kingdom, Canada, Australia, New Zealand, the Netherlands, and Scandinavia. Even though laws, customs, and police practices vary from country to country, it is apparent that the police everywhere experience common problems. In a world that is becoming increasingly interconnected, it is important that police be aware of research and successful practices beyond the borders of their own countries. Each guide is informed by a thorough review of the research literature and reported police practice, and each guide is anonymously peer reviewed by a line police officer, a police executive, and a researcher prior to publication. The review process is independently managed by the COPS Office, which solicits the reviews. For more information about problem-oriented policing, visit the Center for Problem- Oriented Policing online at www.popcenter.org. This website offers free online access to: • The Problem-Specific Guides series • The companion Response Guides and Problem-Solving Tools series • Special publications on crime analysis and on policing terrorism • Instructional information about problem-oriented policing and related topics • An interactive problem-oriented policing training exercise • An interactive Problem Analysis Module • Online access to important police research and practices • Information about problem-oriented policing conferences and award programs

| 3 |

Acknowledgments

Acknowledgments The Problem-Oriented Guides for Police are produced by the Center for Problem-Oriented Policing, whose officers are Michael S. Scott (Director), Ronald V. Clarke (Associate Director) and Graeme R. Newman (Associate Director). While each guide has a primary author, other project team members, COPS Office staff, and anonymous peer reviewers contributed to each guide by proposing text, recommending research, and offering suggestions on matters of format and style. The project team that developed the guide series comprised Herman Goldstein (University of Wisconsin Law School), Ronald V. Clarke (Rutgers University), John E. Eck (University of Cincinnati), Michael S. Scott (University of Wisconsin Law School), Rana Sampson (Police Consultant), and Deborah Lamm Weisel (North Carolina State University). Members of the San Diego; National City, California; and Savannah, Georgia police departments provided feedback on the guides’ format and style in the early stages of the project. Kimberly Nath oversaw the project for the COPS Office. Phyllis Schultze conducted research for the guide at Rutgers University’s Criminal Justice Library. Nancy Leach coordinated the Center for Problem-Oriented Policing’s production process.

| 5 |

The Problem of Shoplifting

The Problem of Shoplifting What This Guide Does and Does Not Cover This guide reviews ways to reduce shoplifting (merchandise theft from the shop floor during business hours), which is a common crime that affects large and small retailers alike. Particularly at risk are self-service stores that sell small items that are easily concealed in clothes or bags. Several offender groups are responsible: (1) opportunistic thieves, not readily distinguishable from ordinary customers, who steal items for personal use (sometimes called petty shoplifters); (2) more determined thieves, usually operating alone, who steal small quantities of goods to sell, often to support drug habits; and (3) groups of organized thieves who steal large quantities of merchandise for resale (often referred to as professional or organized retail theft). Shoplifting is just one of the crimes that occur in the retail environment. Other crimes requiring their own analyses and responses include: • Burglaries of retail stores • Credit card and check frauds by customers • Harassment of immigrant shopkeepers • Robbery of retail shops (e.g., convenience stores, gas stations, liquor stores, pharmacies) • Smash-and-grab burglaries • Thefts and frauds by delivery personnel • Thefts from open-air or covered market stalls • Thefts of merchandise by employees (usually thought to account for more losses than shoplifting) • Vendor frauds, shortchanging, and other offenses Some of these related problems are covered in other guides in this series, all of which are listed at the end of this guide. For the most up-to-date listing of current and future guides, see www.popcenter.org.

| 7 | Shoplifting, 2nd Edition

General Description of the Problem Though common, shoplifting is one of the least detected and reported crimes, according to (1) self reports, (2) observations, and (3) comparisons of marked items with sales of those items. Only about one in 150 shoplifting incidents leads to the offender’s apprehension and subsequent police action.1 It is not surprising that shoplifting is so widespread. Shops contain new goods, temptingly displayed. Self-service provides ample opportunity for shoppers to handle goods (many of which are prepackaged) and conceal them in clothing or bags. People seem to have fewer inhibitions about stealing from shops than from private individuals. They also know they have little chance of getting caught, and, if caught, they can often produce plausible excuses, such as forgetting to pay. In addition, the stock control in shops is so deficient that few retailers know how many goods they lose to shoplifters or to their staff. So long as theft and damage of goods, known in the retail industry as shrinkage, does not rise above 2-3 percent of goods sold, retailers may pay little attention to shoplifting, especially when stolen goods can be taken as a tax write-off. The guide begins by summarizing what is known about the main offender groups involved in shoplifting and by reviewing the police role in dealing with shoplifting. It then reviews factors that increase shoplifting risks and it lists a series of questions that might help you analyze your local shoplifting problem. Finally, it reviews responses to the problem, and what is known about them from research and police practice. It will be apparent that there are many gaps in knowledge, and that particularly lacking is information about the market for goods stolen by shoplifters.†

Main Offender Groups As mentioned above there are three main offender groups: 1. Petty thieves. These shoplifters differ little from a store’s regular clientele. Many of them seem to believe that shoplifting harms no one except an anonymous business. Stores that attract juveniles, males in particular, are more likely to experience shoplifting and some behavioral cues have been found to be characteristic of shoplifters, such as entering the store but making no purchase and tampering with packaging.2 Some research has claimed to identify psychological reasons for theft,‡ but this work has little relevance for policing strategies.

† See Problem-Specific Guide No. 57, Stolen Goods Markets, for further information. ‡ See Klemke (1993) for a comprehensive review. | 8 | The Problem of Shoplifting

2. More determined thieves. Shoplifters who steal regularly to support a drug habit or to provide income show more evidence of planning, such as adapting clothing to facilitate thefts. They often work with lower-level fences, who dispose of the goods by selling them to higher-level fences or out of their own homes, in flea markets or taverns, on the Internet, or through gas stations, bodegas, and pawnshops that they operate. 3. Organized groups. Organized shoplifter groups frequently comprise immigrants (legal or not) from the Middle East, South America, or Asia, perhaps because they can sell the goods to fellow immigrants who run small businesses.† They concentrate their activities in particular states, including Florida, Texas, Georgia, California, and New York.3 Their arrival in a city might be signaled by a spike in reports of goods being shoplifted in large quantities.‡ Each group consists of members with distinct roles: “boosters” steal the goods; “handlers” sell the goods to fences; and others take care of transport and logistics. Boosters act either alone or in groups. They are often provided with a “fence sheet” of the items to be stolen and the quantities requested. They carry tools to remove security tags, they use foil-lined bags to defeat electronic tags, and they may use cell phones to communicate with other group members while shoplifting. They may change bar codes so merchandise registers at much lower prices at checkout (“ticket switching”). They may use stolen credit cards and use the receipts to return stolen goods to the store for cash. In some cases, they may brazenly wheel carts full of merchandise out the doors to a waiting getaway van. The stolen goods may be held in rented storage units before being taken to the group’s home base. The goods are often sold to fences who clean and repackage them to look like new and who then sell them to wholesale diverters, who might mix them with legitimate goods for sale to retailers.4

† They may make use of so-called “golden bodies,” recent immigrants intending to return home after short stays in the United States with excellent credit who open store credit card accounts at department stores and at home improvement, electronics, and other specialty chains. Their credit cards are used by the professional shoplifters to make substantial purchases from these stores. In return, the individuals are paid $10,000 in cash upon return to their home countries (Hayes 2005). ‡ When this happens suddenly at a particular location, retail circles are using the term “flash mobs” to describe these organized shoplifters. | 9 | Shoplifting, 2nd Edition

Harms Caused by Shoplifting Stores may not take official action against shoplifters because prosecution takes time and effort, mistaken apprehensions can result in lawsuits, the store could acquire a reputation for crime if it continually reports shoplifting, and some merchants might fear retaliation. Some merchants are persuaded not to take official action when shoplifters claim it is their first offense, show fear or remorse, and/or agree to pay for the items stolen. In addition, some retailers believe that the police can do little about the problem and may be unwilling to get involved. Others see the police role as simply to deal with thieves whom security staff or store detectives have caught. When particularly blatant shoplifting occurs, or when professional shoplifters are thought to be operating, merchants may call upon the police to take some kind of preventive action, usually in the form of increased presence or patrols. This may be of little deterrent value, since shoplifting takes place inside the store, away from police view. Consequently, this guide focuses on other preventive actions police might take. In many cases, their most important task is to persuade store-owners and managers to improve their security. This is difficult, because many retailers believe that the police should protect them from dishonest people and that people who steal should be caught and punished.† Others are content to ignore the problem until it seriously affects profits. Whatever the reasons, the police may have an uphill task convincing retailers that their sales practices and lack of security may be contributing to the problem. Faced with these attitudes, it is tempting for police to wash their hands of shoplifting and let the shops bear the consequences. But there are many reasons why this may be shortsighted, including the following: • Shoplifting is often regarded as an entry crime, from which juveniles graduate to more serious offenses. • Shoplifting can be said to fuel the drug trade, because it provides the income some addicts need to buy drugs. • For stores in deprived neighborhoods, shoplifting can seriously erode profits and result in store closures. This can depress employment prospects and further erode the amenities in such neighborhoods. • Shoplifting can consume a large proportion of police resources in processing offenders whom the store has detained. In this regard, the police are at the mercy of merchants who may avoid changing their business practices in favor of simply relying on security staff and police to handle shoplifters.

† British retailers, in particular, have sought to avoid the term “shoplifting” on grounds that it suggests a less serious form of theft. They prefer “shop theft.” | 10 | The Problem of Shoplifting

• Professional shoplifters are increasingly resorting to violence, putting the sales associates and customers at risk of being hurt.5 • Many shoplifting groups are thought to have connections to organized crime6 and illicit profits obtained from professional shoplifting may be used to finance terrorist organizations.7 For all these reasons, police cannot ignore shoplifting. The challenge facing them is to conduct a thorough analysis of the local problem to put together a combination of preventive responses. Factors Contributing to Shoplifting Understanding the factors that contribute to your problem will help you frame your own local analysis questions, determine good measures of effectiveness, recognize key points of intervention, and select an appropriate set of responses. Many of the factors contributing to a heightened risk of shoplifting are under management control, while others, such as seasonal and temporal patterns, are not; even in the latter case, however, knowledge of those patterns can assist in framing a preventive response.

Goods Sold One of the main factors determining a store’s shoplifting rate is the type of goods sold. For obvious reasons, furniture stores have much lower shoplifting rates than, say, convenience or drug stores. Numerous surveys have shown that the most common items stolen from retail stores in the United States include tobacco products (particularly cigarettes), health and beauty products (such as over-the-counter analgesics and decongestants,† popular remedies, and birth control products), recorded music and videos, and apparel ranging from athletic shoes to children’s clothing, with an emphasis on designer labels. One item that is especially popular among professional shoplifters at present is infant formula, presumably because it is expensive and easily sold.

† Clarke (1999) notes that certain analgesics contain ingredients that can be used in making other drugs, and that decongestants help to produce a high when taken together with some illegal drugs. See Problem-Specific Guide No. 16, Clandestine Methamphetamine Labs, 2nd Edition, for further information. He also notes that some frequently stolen products, such as hemorrhoid remedies and condoms, can be embarrassing to buy. Self-checkout systems that allow customers to scan and bag their own goods might provide a solution. | 11 | Shoplifting, 2nd Edition

Photo credit: Ronald Clarke

Self-checkout systems such as the one shown on the right are a new alternative to the standard clerk checkout seen on the left and might reduce theft of products that some shoppers find embarrassing to buy.

Some items might be constantly stolen, while thefts of others may reflect the popularity of new product releases, such as movies, video games, and music titles. Also, the popularity for theft can be highly brand-dependent, so that, for example, only certain brands are stolen of razor blades, cigarettes, designer clothes or even, according to recent media reports, laundry detergent.8 The acronym CRAVED captures the essential attributes of these “hot products” which are Concealable, Removable, Available, Valuable, Enjoyable, and Disposable.9, † The last of these attributes—disposability—may be the most important in determining the volume of goods shoplifted. Those shoplifting for profit must be able to sell or barter what they steal. The most vulnerable parts of the store to shoplifting are those that carry hot products. One study in a large music store in London found that the highest theft rates were in the sections carrying rock and pop recordings (nowadays, it would probably be rap or hip-hop). Equally expensive recordings in the classical music department were rarely stolen.10

† See the forthcoming Problem-Solving Tool Guide, Understanding Theft of ‘Hot Products,’ for further information. | 12 | The Problem of Shoplifting

Seasonal and Temporal Patterns Most shoplifting occurs when stores are busiest, with the majority of incidents occurring late in the week, between Wednesday and Saturday.11 Seasonal shoplifting corresponds with the demand for goods, which means that much shoplifting occurs during pre-Easter, pre- summer, and pre-Christmas periods. As mentioned, juveniles commit much shoplifting, and consequently, high-risk times include non-school days during the late mornings, and afternoons into the evening.12

Location Research does not provide a clear indication of the risk factors related to a store’s location, but shoplifting rates tend to be higher for stores with the following features: • In city centers and other busy places, with a large number of casual customers • Fronting onto the open street • Close to highways that provide easy escape routes • Near schools, with many juvenile customers • In economically deprived areas, with large concentrations of impoverished or addicted residents

Retail Policies, Staffing, and Stock Control Retail policies, staffing, and stock control are store management’s responsibility, but these are heavily influenced by how competitive, profit-driven, and technology-dependent is the broader retail environment. For example, stock control is usually deficient because the effort needed to keep proper track of stock has rarely been justified by any reductions in theft and other forms of shrinkage. Similarly, it would be impossibly expensive for stores to abandon self-service and rely instead on armies of helpful, attentive sales clerks, even though this would substantially reduce shoplifting.† The savings in reduced theft would be greatly outweighed by increased staff wages and, possibly, by sales lost as a result of shoppers being unable to inspect goods at their leisure. Such marketing considerations might also limit the scope for tightening up return policies, which, if too liberal, can encourage theft of goods to be returned for cash refunds. For example, some clothing stores do not have changing rooms because the staff costs of monitoring them to prevent shoplifting may be too great. These stores have to allow the return of clothes that do not fit.

† Even so, retailers might be advised to take account of the finding that shoplifters do not think that “young, skater type teen” store associates are effective place managers because they “are kind of lax…and they really don’t care” (Cardone 2006: 83). | 13 | Shoplifting, 2nd Edition

However, increased competition is continually eroding retail profit margins, and thus the incentive to reduce shrinkage is increasing. At the same time, the sales environment is constantly changing in the search for increased profits. One current example is the increasing use of self-scan checkouts that reduce staff costs and perceived wait times for customers. However, self-scan presents new opportunities for shoplifting, despite security features that include cameras to monitor the transactions, and software systems to detect irregularities.13 Theft methods include scanning one item and including more of the same item without paying for them, using wrong item codes that are cheaper and putting unchecked items in strollers. With increasing use of self-scan, stores might find ways of closing these security loopholes.

Store Layout and Displays Research provides little guidance, but common sense suggests certain store layout and display features contribute to shoplifting.14 Most of these relate to the staff’s ability to supervise shoppers, and stores at greater risk include large ones which make it easier for organized groups to hide among ordinary shoppers. Also vulnerable are stores with the following features: • Many exits, particularly where they are accessible without passing through the checkout • Passageways, blind corners, and hidden alcoves • Restrooms or changing rooms • High displays that conceal shoppers (and shoplifters) from view • Crowded areas around displays of high-risk items • Aisles that staff cannot easily survey from one end

“I’ll find, like, the most unlikely place a customer’s going to go, like the most boring items in the store, I’ll go into that aisle and try to get into the packages as fast as I can…then I just keep the product with me…and just walk out the normal exit.” – Pat 15

| 14 | The Problem of Shoplifting

Goods on the ground floor especially near entrances are at greater theft risk because this is often where the newest products are displayed, because these areas receive least employee attention, and because shoplifters can dart in and out quickly. Other risk factors include the store’s security measures, such as CCTV surveillance, security tagging, access control, employees’ location, mirrors, and how well the hot products are secured.16

The Internet As mentioned, little is known about how stolen goods are sold,† but one study undertaken in 2008 calculated that approximately 18 percent of all stolen goods were sold on the Internet.17 In some cases, goods are pre-sold on Internet sites before they are stolen from stores by organized theft groups.18 The profit on e-fence merchandise (approximately 70 percent of retail) is much higher than merchandise sold through a traditional fence.19

† See Problem-Specific Guide No. 57, Stolen Goods Markets, for further information. | 15 |

Understanding Your Local Problem

Understanding Your Local Problem To develop an effective response, you must combine the basic facts reviewed above about shoplifting with more detailed understanding of your local problem. In most cases, your problem is likely to involve a group of stores, such as those in a city center, mall, or shopping precinct. Accordingly, your analysis is likely to focus on differential shoplifting risks among the stores in your group, and the reasons for those differences. In any case, the measures appropriate to deal with the problem will vary with the nature of the stores at risk. It is likely that you will mostly be dealing with petty shoplifting, but in big cities, particularly those in the five high-risk states—Florida, Texas, Georgia, California, and New York, as mentioned earlier—you should determine if organized groups are involved. If they are, you might need the cooperation of state and federal agencies, as these criminal organizations often work within several states. An important indicator of organized shoplifting is whether large numbers of goods are stolen at one time. Shoplifting analysis is made difficult by low reporting rates, and by the fact that police records rarely permit shoplifting offenses to be readily identified among reported thefts. There are other ways to gather information about your local problem, including the following, but these, too, have their difficulties: • Store apprehensions may provide some useful information, but the data tend to say as much about surveillance and apprehension practices as about the “typical” offender, or even the most targeted goods. • Observational studies—in which randomly selected shoppers are followed around the store—can produce some useful results, but they are labor-intensive and ethically problematic. If followed by police or security, those observed stealing would have to be apprehended; if followed by researchers, the police or the store might be criticized for permitting this approach.20 • The most accurate way to assess retail theft is repeated systematic counting of items on display, but this, again, is labor-intensive.† It is also difficult to determine whether losses are due to theft by customers or by staff, or whether they are the result of innocent clerical error.

† Researchers have developed an effective method of measuring theft (see Buckle et al. 1992). Small tags, color-coded by item, are attached to each high-risk item. An inventory of these items is taken before opening the store for business. When items are sold, clerks remove the tags that are then counted at the end of the day. The number of tags collected is added to the number of those items left on the floor. If the total does not match the initial inventory, then the residual number of items is presumed stolen. | 17 | Shoplifting, 2nd Edition

In some cases, store stock-control records or staff may be able to provide information about items particularly vulnerable to theft. However, whenever possible, you should check such information by asking the kinds of questions discussed below. The effort required to obtain accurate information about problems is almost always justified by the improved responses that result. Stakeholders In addition to criminal justice agencies, the following groups have an interest in the shoplifting problem and ought to be considered for the contribution they might make to gathering information about the problem and responding to it: • Nearby stores experiencing a shoplifting problem • Similar stores, or stores in the same chain, not experiencing a shoplifting problem • Managers of nearby shopping centers or malls • Corporate loss prevention officials • Local chambers of commerce and other retail business associations Asking the Right Questions The following are questions you should ask in analyzing your particular shoplifting problem, even if the answers are not always readily available. The answers will help you choose the most appropriate set of responses. For some information categories, the questions are divided into those you should ask for all shoplifting problems and those that you should ask specifically for organized shoplifting.

Incidents For all shoplifting: • How many incidents are detected? • How much is typically lost (goods’ dollar value, lost profit)? • What proportion of shrinkage does shoplifting account for? Compared with employee theft or delivery fraud? • How do targeted stores’ shrinkage rates compare with those of similar-size stores of the same type? • Which items do shoplifters target most frequently? • Do the goods stolen fit the CRAVED model? (See the “Factors Contributing to Shoplifting/Goods Sold” section above.) Are they sold or kept for personal use? If sold, how so? | 18 | Understanding Your Local Problem

For organized shoplifting: • How many times have victim-stores been victimized in the past week, month, year? • How many of these incidents can be classified as those carried out by “flash mobs”? • What is the average dollar value of goods lost during each incident? • How are the shoplifted goods fenced? Are they sold on the Internet?

Offenders For all shoplifting: • What is known about offenders? Do they tend to belong to any particular demographic group? What proportion are juveniles? • What proportions of offenders are casual/opportunistic or determined/addicts? Are organized rings involved? • Do some types of offenders use particular shoplifting methods or target particular goods? • Are there repeat offenders? For organized shoplifting: • How is the group organized? • How many people are involved in the group? What is the typical group size? • What is the task distribution among the group members? Who are the boosters, lower- level fences, higher-level fences, and illegitimate wholesale diverters? • What is the demographic profile of the members involved in the group? • Is the group local or from out-of-town?

Locations/Times • What is the nature of the surrounding neighborhood? • When do thefts mainly occur (time of day, day of week, month, season)? Are certain items more commonly stolen during certain seasons (e.g., batteries for toys at Christmas)? • Is the problem concentrated at particular stores, or does it affect a cluster of stores? If concentrated at particular stores, what do they have in common?

| 19 | Shoplifting, 2nd Edition

Conditions Facilitating Shoplifting • How large is the store? What type of store is it? What market segment does it target? • What are the store’s hours? Is it open at night? Are nearby businesses open at night and on weekends? • Does the store have a security department or set of policies on apprehending shoplifters? • Does the store treat shoplifting as a business cost or does it invest resources in prevention? • Does the store report shoplifting incidents to the police? • How adequate is stock control? • Where are targeted goods located in the store? • Is lack of natural surveillance a contributory factor? Can thieves conceal goods without being seen? • After stealing, can thieves evade store employees? • Is there more than one escape route? • What security hardware does the store have? Mirrors? Electronic tagging? Closed-circuit television (CCTV) cameras? • What other prevention measures are in place?

Current Responses • How do police currently handle shoplifting incidents? • Do police have a separate unit dealing with organized shoplifting groups? • Do police train or regulate private security forces? • How do prosecutors handle shoplifting charges? • What sentences do courts typically hand down for convicted offenders? Do offenders comply with the sentences?

| 20 | Understanding Your Local Problem

Measuring Your Effectiveness You should take measures of your problem before you implement responses, to determine how serious the problem is, and after you implement them, to determine whether they have been effective. Measurement allows you to determine to what degree your efforts have succeeded, and suggests how you might modify your responses if they are not producing the intended results. For more detailed guidance on measuring effectiveness, see Problem- Solving Tools Guide No. 1, Assessing Responses to Problems: An Introductory Guide for Police Problem-Solvers, and Problem-Solving Tools Guide No. 10, Analyzing Crime Displacement and Diffusion.

Potential indicators of an effective response to shoplifting include the following: • Fewer shoplifting incidents • Fewer repeat offenders • Increased identification and break-up of organized shoplifting groups • Increased number of fences and e-fences identified and disrupted • Decreased shrinkage • Increased sales • Increased profits If you suspect that shoplifting is currently underreported to police, increased reporting might be a positive indicator of your efforts, at least temporarily. If you suspect too few shoplifters are getting caught, a temporary increase in apprehensions might also be a positive indicator. Ultimately, though, the number of reported thefts and apprehensions should decline as the number of actual shoplifting incidents declines.

| 21 |

Responses to the Problem of Shoplifting

Responses to the Problem of Shoplifting Once you have analyzed your local problem and established a baseline for measuring effectiveness, you should consider possible responses to address the problem. It is critical that you tailor responses to local circumstances, and that you can justify each response based on reliable analysis. In most cases, an effective strategy will involve implementing several different responses. Law enforcement responses alone are seldom effective in reducing or solving the problem. Do not limit yourself to considering what police can do: give careful consideration to others in your community who share responsibility for the problem and can help police better respond to it. The response strategies discussed below are drawn from research studies and police reports. This section reviews what is known about the effectiveness of these responses in dealing with shoplifting. Unfortunately, the information is severely limited because few of the common preventive practices have been evaluated. Retailers have been reluctant to undertake the necessary studies, and to share the results of any studies they do complete. Government has funded little research in this field, generally regarding it as the private sector’s domain. In the absence of research, you cannot assume that retailers have learned through long experience what does and does not work. For example, hiring store detectives is a staple response to shoplifting, but as will be seen below, their effectiveness is questionable. Hiring them usually seems to be an economic choice dictated by the need to do something about shoplifting. General Considerations for an Effective Response Strategy

Police can do little on their own to prevent shoplifting, and you will have to persuade the retailers themselves to act. You may have to explain why police can achieve little through more patrols, and why heavier court sentences are of limited value. You may want to explain how the store’s goods and sales practices may be contributing to the problem. You may have to convince retailers that they cannot ignore the problem, due to the costs to the community and, in the long run, the stores themselves. Finally, you will have to offer them guidance on preventive measures they can take to reduce the problem.

| 23 | Shoplifting, 2nd Edition

Photo credit: Kip Kellogg

Properly placed mirrors like this “fish-eye” mirror, allow staff to keep watch over customers and goods that might otherwise be hidden from view.

It is important that shoplifting responses be selective and based on a thorough understanding of the risks. For example, the highest-risk goods should be given the greatest protection, and dealing with organized shoplifters will demand a wider set of measures than those needed for petty shoplifting. You must therefore think carefully about the nature of the risk, which varies greatly with the kinds of offenders, the nature of the store, and the goods offered. These factors also determine the nature of the remedies. The security approach required for a self-service supermarket is quite different from that required for a jewelry store. Department stores with huge turnovers of expensive goods can afford to spend much more on security than small retailers can. In all cases, you must appreciate stores’ need to make a profit. This determines selling practices and how much money is available for preventing shoplifting.

| 24 | Responses to the Problem of Shoplifting

Even when shops can afford more for security, they are likely to resist this expenditure. In making your case, you may need to do the following: • Calculate the likely cost of measures, such as installing CCTV or hiring security guards • Convince owners that they can recoup the cost of increased security through reduced losses associated with shoplifting—item replacement, profit, and lawsuit costs • Enlist the support of the chamber of commerce and other business organizations to persuade owners to improve security, or to brief the local media on the problem and proposed solutions Specific Responses to Reduce Shoplifting Effective shoplifting prevention depends on well-rounded strategies encompassing good retailing practices, appropriate staffing, carefully articulated shoplifting policies, and selective technology use. The measures in the final group are particularly addressed to defeating organized shoplifters, which responses are over and above those for defeating petty shoplifting.

For All Shoplifting Retailing Practice Good management is the first line of defense against shoplifting. Managers must ensure that stores are properly laid out, have adequate inventory controls, and follow standard security practices. 1. Improving store layout and displays. Store layout and displays must make it easier for staff to exercise effective surveillance. This includes the following: • Reducing the number of exits, blind corners, and recesses • Carefully placing mirrors • Providing good, even lighting • Eliminating clutter and obstructions • Placing goods away from entrances and exits • Creating clear sight lines in aisles and reducing the height of displays • Reducing crowding near displays of high-risk items • Moving hot products into higher-security zones with more staff surveillance • Speeding up checkout to reduce congestion and waiting, which provide the opportunity for concealment

| 25 | Shoplifting, 2nd Edition

Tightening stock controls. 2. Photo credit: Kip Kellogg Inventory-control procedures should permit shoplifting trends to be detected, and shoplifting to be distinguished from employee theft. Unfortunately, very few retailers have such controls in place, but the more widespread use of merchandise bar coding and point-of-sales technology at checkout is resulting in significant improvements in stock control. Cluttered merchandise displays make it harder for These improvements can be staff to monitor shoplifting. expected to increase with further technological developments. 3. Upgrading retail security. Standard security must make shoplifting more difficult. This may include the following: • Restricting the number of unaccompanied minors allowed in small neighborhood stores • Establishing clear rules for use of changing rooms in clothing stores • Placing retail associates in changing-room stations • Displaying only the cassette, CD, and DVD cases in music and video stores (and only one shoe per pair in shoe shops) • Keeping high-value items in locked displays, or securing them through cable locks and security hangers • Encouraging shoppers to use supermarket-type baskets for purchases (which removes the excuse for putting things in their own bags or pockets) or providing them with secure lockers for their bags • Sealing bags of legitimate purchases to reduce impulse stealing • Giving receipts and, where there is a high shoplifting risk, checking them against goods on exit • Requiring proof of purchase for refunds

| 26 | Responses to the Problem of Shoplifting

“The simple step of approaching a customer and asking if they need help finding anything tends to inhibit criminal behavior among those who prefer to remain unseen and unheard.”

— Brad Brekke, Vice President of Assets Protection, Target

4. Posting warning notices on high-risk merchandise. Many stores display signs reminding customers that shoplifting is a crime, and warning that shoplifters will be prosecuted, but it is doubtful that such warnings have more than a marginal deterrent effect on a few susceptible people. One early study showed that when specific merchandise was prominently marked with large red stars as being frequently taken by shoplifters, shoplifting was virtually eliminated. A more recent study showed that this deterrent effect was greater for items next to the items marked with a sign that read “Attention Shoppers! Items Marked with a RED RIBBON are Frequently Shoplifted!”21

Staffing 5. Hiring more and better-trained sales staff. Stores should hire sufficient numbers of staff to properly oversee goods and customers, especially at high-risk periods for shoplifting. Stores should train staff to be attentive to customers and alert for thieves, and should also train them in procedures for dealing with shoplifting incidents. For instance, in order to sustain a prosecution, it is usually necessary to prove that the goods were not only taken away, but that there was intent to avoid payment. It is therefore always advisable to wait until the suspect has left the shop before apprehending them or they may claim they intended to pay before leaving. 6. Hiring security guards. Little is known from research about the effectiveness of uniformed security guards in any environment—and retail is no exception. Only one small study has been published, and it suggested that security guards had less value than electronic article surveillance (EAS) or store redesign in decreasing the theft risk; however, the study’s small sample limits the findings’ reliability.22 7. Hiring loss prevention and asset protection teams. Most large retailers invest in loss prevention and asset protection teams that investigate theft within the stores once it occurs. They perform various functions, such as checking receipts when customers walk out, and monitoring the surveillance systems inside a store to identify and stop shoplifters.23

| 27 | Shoplifting, 2nd Edition

Photo credit: Kip Kellogg

Security guards who move around, creating an active, visible presence, are likely to be more effective at preventing shoplifting.

Retailers in South Africa contracted with third-party companies (“Hot Product Controllers”) to help stop the shoplifting of products that accounted for 80 percent of the shrinkage within their stores. These contractors focused on five key areas, which included securing delivery, fast tracking, securing storage, conducting daily counts, and conducting shelf replenishment. Their efforts resulted in a 61 percent reduction in shrinkage in all hot products, with the greatest reductions achieved in sugar and razor blades.24

Shoplifting Policies Many stores routinely refer apprehended shoplifters to the police. For persistent offenders, this is clearly necessary. In the case of more opportunistic shoplifters, many of whom show shock at getting caught, it is doubtful that police arrest has any additional deterrent value.† An inflexible policy of referring shoplifters to the police could result in reduced staff enthusiasm for apprehending them, and stores are probably best served by a flexible shoplifting policy that includes formal and informal avenues and, perhaps, civil recovery.

† Sherman and Gartin (1986), in a randomized experiment, found that recidivism rates did not differ for two large groups of apprehended shoplifters: those released and those arrested.

| 28 | Responses to the Problem of Shoplifting

Belief in the value of prosecution is strong among many retailers and the general public and there is little chance the police will be relieved of this burden.† Consequently, the arrest process should be made more efficient. Ways of doing so fall outside this guide’s scope, but some police forces have developed systems whereby private security officers are authorized and trained to write criminal summonses themselves (after first checking with the police by phone for outstanding warrants and arrest histories). This obviates the need for patrol officers to process arrests, but still gets the cases into the formal criminal process. 8. Using civil recovery. In nearly every state, retailers can use civil law to collect restitution from shoplifters, and many retailers take advantage of this.25 Civil recovery is designed to operate quickly, with little recourse to the courts. Civil recovery offers the retailer the benefit of recovering more than just the retail cost of the item stolen, requires a lesser degree of proof, spares the thief an arrest and conviction record, and relieves the burden on the criminal justice system. 9. Using informal police sanctions. In some jurisdictions first offenders are given the option, as an alternative to prosecution, of participating in programs in which they are instructed about shoplifting’s harms. If the offender completes the program the initial charge is dismissed and, sometimes, upon petition, can be erased from the records, so that the person does not have a “criminal” record.‡ In Britain, similar police programs are called “cautioning.” One program introduced by the Thames Valley Police combines counseling modules and a formal caution, and claims to have substantially reduced re-offending among juvenile shoplifters. Counseling modules include meetings with store managers, sessions with youth workers about available leisure activities, and group work to learn about resisting peer pressure to offend.26

† Not only is shoplifter prosecution of doubtful preventive value, but also, practice in this area is fraught with difficulties: Merchants may see the police as being at their beck and call; private security staff may expect the police to take cases that are not “good,” or that reflect a lack of discretion (e.g., a 12-year-old stealing a candy bar); and there are issues regarding obtaining proper evidence, identifying alleged offenders, using force, targeting minorities, imposing burdens on the criminal justice system, using statutes or ordinances/summonses or physical arrests, etc. ‡ As an alternative to prosecution, police sometimes also refer first offenders to structured programs like the Stop Shoplifting Education Program, operated by the Better Business Bureau of WNY, Inc. (1993), which claims to reduce recidivism. In addition, stores themselves sometimes run first-offender warning programs, without extensive police involvement. Stores might check with police to determine whether the offender has been charged before and, if not, issue their own warning, without having an arrest made.

| 29 | Shoplifting, 2nd Edition

Photo credit: Kip Kellogg

Surveillance cameras and CCTV are increasingly used to prevent shoplifting, but more study is needed to determine their effects.

Technology 10. Installing and monitoring CCTV. Improvements in quality and reductions in cost have resulted in the widespread use of CCTV to prevent shoplifting. Few evaluations have been published, though one careful study of 15 clothing stores in England found that CCTV’s value was directly related to the system’s sophistication. Effectiveness was quite marked in the first few months after installation, but declined rapidly thereafter, which the researchers explained by arguing that “would-be offenders became progressively inured or desensitized to CCTV’s deterrent potential.”27 Little is known about CCTV’s value in other kinds of stores, and there is “a raft of unanswered questions about its impact. These questions relate to the following: • The detection of offenders • The deterrence of would-be offenders, and possible displacement of criminal activities elsewhere • The relative value of video recordings and real-time images • The ability of operators to monitor and make sense of multiple images • The impact on customers (who may be reassured, even when there are no measurable benefits) • The effect on shop staff (who may become less vigilant about crime following its installation)”28

| 30 | Responses to the Problem of Shoplifting

Photo credit: Kip Kellogg

Electronic tags affixed to goods activate alarms when passed through exit gates. Electronic tagging has demonstrated effectiveness in preventing shoplifting, although knowledgeable offenders can sometimes defeat the systems.

11. Using electronic article surveillance. Electronic article surveillance (EAS) is often known as electronic tagging. Exit gates detect tags that have not been removed or deactivated, and sound an alarm. The tags have been made progressively smaller and the detectors have become more reliable. Increasingly, tags are now being included in the goods’ packaging at manufacture (source tagging), which reduces the cost.29 Despite their widespread use, few evaluations have been published of EAS systems.30 The most comprehensive of these evaluations used comparisons between stores with and without EAS systems, and before-and-after studies, in a variety of retail settings. The authors concluded that EAS could reduce shoplifting and total inventory shortage from 35 to 75 percent.31 The considerable costs of buying and running EAS systems must be set against these benefits and the fact that sophisticated offenders are knowledgeable about ways to defeat EAS systems.

| 31 | Shoplifting, 2nd Edition

12. Attaching ink tags to merchandise. Ink tags attached to clothing are quite different from electronic tags. Rather than sounding an alarm when removed from the store, and thus increasing the offender’s risk of getting caught, ink tags remove the rewards of theft by ruining the garments to which they are affixed when the thief tries to detach them. To date, only one rigorous evaluation has been reported: it concluded that ink tags might be more effective than EAS when used in the same retail environments.32 Devices are now available that combine both electronic and ink tags’ advantages, but with the inevitable disadvantage of increased costs. Other devices not containing ink are also available, such as small clamps that cannot be removed from items such as jewelry or eyeglasses. 13. Using advanced surveillance electronic systems. These systems come in a number of varieties including the following: • Video Investigator® can monitor shoppers’ movements and detect unusual activity, such as removing multiple items of the same type from a particular shelf. The software alerts the monitoring room operators and security guards with a chime or a flashing screen.33 • ShelfAlert® is an on-shelf security rack that can alert the monitoring center when too many products are taken off the shelf at the same time. The store can set the number of items that will trigger the alert.34 • LaneHawk® can spot packages hidden on rungs underneath the carts. Cameras mounted in cashier stands scan these racks. If an item matches an image in a database, the system computes the product price and automatically adds it to the customer’s bill.35 • RFID (radio frequency identification) technology is increasingly being used to track items within stores, as well as check inventory levels. RFID tags, which can be as small as a pinhead, transmit signals that can travel up to 300 ft. The tags can be read even when concealed within an item.36 This allows items to be tracked as they travel through the store. As in the case of Video Investigator and ShelfAlert, RFID tags can serve as alert systems when large numbers of items are removed from the shelves.

| 32 | Responses to the Problem of Shoplifting

For Organized Shoplifting 14. Establishing early warning systems. Merchants in some areas have found it useful to establish a same-day early warning system whereby they notify one another about the presence of mobile gangs of organized shoplifters, but there have been no formal evaluations of this practice. Although local police are mainly alerted to organized shoplifting incidents through retail investigators, they can also identify suspicious activities, for example, by the discovery of large quantities of retail merchandise during routine calls or traffic stops. 15. Forming task forces with other law enforcement agencies. Organized-theft groups rarely operate within one jurisdiction, and it is important that local police forge partnerships with state and federal law enforcement agencies. Several such partnerships have proven effective in dismantling some of the largest professional shoplifting groups in the country. Operation Greenquest was established by the U.S. Customs Service to target thieves who financed Al Quaeda and other terrorist groups.37 Operation Blackbird, mounted by a task force comprising investigators from local, state, and federal agencies formed by the Pasadena (California) Police Department, uncovered some large organized crime shoplifting operations.38 16. Forming partnerships and working with retailers and manufacturers.† Many partnerships have been established among law enforcement agencies, retailers, retail associations, and manufacturers. Successful partnerships of these kinds with local stores have been undertaken by the police in Charlotte-Mecklenburg, North Carolina;39 Mesa, Arizona; Colorado Springs, Colorado;40 Portsmouth, England;41 and Boise, Idaho.42 In Boise, for example, a growing organized shoplifting problem was addressed in 2005 by the establishment of the Organized Retail Crime Interdiction Team. This took a number of preventive initiatives that included updating stakeholders on recent trends through regular monthly meetings, using email and text messaging to maintain an efficient intelligence flow between retailers and police, and responding immediately to in-progress incidents. These actions led quite quickly to a significant reduction in organized shoplifting incidents.

† See Problem-Solving Tools Guide No. 5, Partnering with Businesses to Address Public Safety Problems, for further information.

| 33 | Shoplifting, 2nd Edition

Notable partnerships that encompass wider areas and a larger number of entities include the following: • The Law Enforcement Retail Partnership Network (LERPnet) was established in 2007 by the National Retail Federation in partnership with the FBI, the Food Marketing Institute, and the Retail Industry Leaders Association. LERPnet is a web- based repository that allows retailers to share information with each other and with police about shoplifting incidents.43 • The ORC Pilot Program was launched by U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement in four cities with known organized retail crime activity: Houston, Los Angeles, Miami, and New York City. The program developed a database with retail industry contacts and a threat-assessment to help determine the extent of organized retail crime. It also explored how organized shoplifting groups exploit vulnerabilities in the banking system to launder profits. The pilot program resulted in multiple arrests and convictions, leading to the seizure of nearly $4.9 million in cash, property, and money instruments. It has now been expanded into an ongoing national initiative known as SEARCH (Seizing Earnings and Assets from Retail Crime Heists). • In 2008, eBay® launched the PROACT (Partnering with Retailers Offensively to Attack Crime and Theft) program which aimed to combat stolen goods sales on its web site. Based on information received from regulatory and law enforcement agencies, the site created filters to search for prohibited goods up for auction. eBay also cooperated with police in monitoring and reporting suspicious activity on its web site. Other web sites, which are also potential outlets for stolen merchandise, such as Amazon.com®, Overstock.com®, and Craigslist, might usefully be drawn into such partnerships.44 17. Monitoring stores’ goods suppliers. Retailers might inadvertently buy goods that have been stolen by organized shoplifters unless they carefully monitor their suppliers.45 Some store buyers might also be bribed by these suppliers to buy stolen goods. To reduce these risks, the retailer’s loss prevention team can conduct unannounced visits to the suppliers’ warehouse(s) to look for clues suggesting that the goods may be illegitimate. These include the products’ condition and the overall warehouse condition, as well as the presence of (a) cleaning stations and chemicals, (b) security tags and labels on the floors or in the trash cans, and (c) repackaging stations. Talking to other retailers who obtain their goods from the same suppliers might also prove useful. In addition, buyers should be trained to identify and report possible suspicious transactions, and they should be encouraged to report to police when a deal is “too good to be true.”

| 34 | Responses to the Problem of Shoplifting

18. Using social networking sites to gather information about shoplifting incidents. A 2011 survey of retailers found that about 70 percent of them use Facebook, Twitter, LinkedIn®, Craigslist, Myspace, Google, Foursquare, Pipl, Carnivore Lite, YouTube, and Flickr® to gather information about shoplifting from their stores. Using these networking sites they identify perpetrators, investigate connections between perpetrators and company employees, and identify premises where the stolen goods may be stored or sold. Retailers report “huge success” using Facebook to gather intelligence about past events and planned activities.46 When “view only” is selected, no direct contact is made with the subjects, thereby allowing the investigators to gather this information without their knowledge. Police, therefore, can use these social networking sites to gather similar information. Responses with Limited Effectiveness 19. Hiring store detectives. Some stores rely on store detectives, despite research that suggests they may have only a limited impact on shoplifting. When researchers have followed random samples of people entering stores, few of those they have observed shoplifting have also been seen by the store detectives.47 A study in a large London music store, with four store detectives on duty at any one time, suggested that the store would need to hire 17 times this number to be able to catch all the shoplifters likely to enter the store—clearly not an economic proposition.48 Most stores do not advertise store detectives’ presence, but some do. Advertising their presence may provide a greater deterrent, but it may also mean that shoplifters exercise greater caution. No research has evaluated these possibilities. While it must be assumed that store detectives have some deterrent value, it is possible that they lower other staff’s vigilance. It is also important that store detectives spend as much time as possible on the shop floor, and not have their time consumed in court attendance or police liaison work. 20. Arresting and prosecuting shoplifters. There is little hard evidence that apprehending, arresting, and prosecuting shoplifters results in reduced shoplifting by those arrested or by others who learn about the arrests. Studies of criminal sanctioning have consistently failed to show any clear deterrent effects. In regard to shoplifting, the chances of getting caught are so low, and the risks of severe punishment so small, that most researchers believe offenders pay little attention to the possible costs.49

| 35 | Shoplifting, 2nd Edition

21. Using shaming punishments for first-time offenders. Many retailers, especially those in California, Alabama, Georgia, Tennessee, and Texas, have increasingly used “shaming” as an alternative to prosecution resulting in jail time, fines, or other traditional penalties. Convicted shoplifters are ordered (sometimes by judges after consulting with the store’s management) to wear a sign and go about in public declaring their crimes. Little is known about the effectiveness of shaming. 22. Banning known shoplifters. A related practice entails banning offenders from, and posting their pictures in, stores. Little is known about the effectiveness of this practice, but if it publicizes shoplifters’ identity, it might have some limited value. However, where courts have not convicted those identified, both the merchants and the police engaged in the practice are vulnerable to criticism and legal challenge. 23. Launching public information campaigns. Some communities have launched media campaigns to inform the public about the shoplifting’s harms, encourage people to report it, and increase knowledge about the consequences of apprehension. Posters, pamphlets, classes, and public service announcements have all been used to get the message across.50, † Evaluations of these programs have produced little evidence that they reduce shoplifting.51

† See Response Guide No. 5, Crime Prevention Publicity Campaigns, for further information. | 36 | Appendix

Appendix: Summary of Responses to Shoplifting The table below summarizes the responses to shoplifting, the mechanisms by which they are intended to work, the conditions under which they should work best, and some factors you should consider before implementing a particular response. It is critical that you tailor responses to local circumstances, and that you can justify each response based on reliable analysis. In most cases, an effective strategy will involve implementing several different responses. Law enforcement responses alone are seldom effective in reducing or solving the problem. Responses 1–13 outlined below address all shoplifting, while 14–18 deal specifically with shoplifting conducted by organized groups. Responses 19–23 are those with limited effectiveness. Response Page Response How It Works Works Best If… Considerations No. No. For All Shoplifting Retailing Practice 1 25 Improving store Makes it easier for …staff are trained May be relatively layout and displays staff to exercise and motivated to inexpensive, but effective surveillance detect shoplifting some stores’ basic design makes it hard to eliminate all opportunities for shoplifters to conceal their activity 2 26 Tightening stock Helps managers to …managers have Increases in source controls detect changes in incentives to reduce tagging and amounts or patterns shoplifting electronic point-of- of shoplifting sales systems will gradually lead to improvements in stock control

| 37 | Shoplifting, 2nd Edition

Response Page Response How It Works Works Best If… Considerations No. No. 3 26 Upgrading retail Makes it harder for …staff and managers Some security security shoplifters to operate have incentives to practices may be reduce shoplifting unpopular with staff and customers alike, and consequently have the effect of reducing sales; they sometimes carry costs in terms of staff time 4 27 Posting warning Alerts potential …the notices A low-cost measure; notices on high-risk thieves that identify the most might alarm some merchandise identified frequently targeted innocent shoppers merchandise may items be subject to special surveillance Staffing 5 27 Hiring more and Makes it harder for …staffing levels are Can be a relatively better-trained sales shoplifters to operate increased at high- expensive way to staff risk periods reduce shoplifting 6 27 Hiring security Provides a deterrent …the guards are Guard characteristics guards to shoplifters who properly trained, are and behavior are might otherwise physically imposing, extremely important: believe they and have an active, poor guards have no could escape if visible presence effect on shoplifting apprehended by sales staff 7 27 Hiring loss Improves strategic …the teams are Some team functions prevention and asset responses to prevent briefed about the may overlap with protection teams and deter shoplifting specific concerns and those already guided to focus on employed by store certain key areas security personnel

| 38 | Appendix

Response Page Response How It Works Works Best If… Considerations No. No. Shoplifting Policies 8 29 Using civil recovery Provides retailers …administrative May not be an with a practical procedures are clear option for small means of recovering and uncomplicated, retailers who lack some shoplifting and shoplifters time and resources costs; penalizes and are able to pay to pursue civil deters apprehended restitution recovery shoplifters 9 29 Using informal Of unknown …combined with Usually used only police sanctions deterrent value, efforts to change with first-time but saves time for offenders’ attitudes offenders; often retailers, police, and about shoplifting limited to juveniles the criminal justice system Technology 10 30 Installing and Increases surveillance …the CCTV Employees must monitoring CCTV of vulnerable cameras are located be trained in merchandise and close to key areas equipment’s use; locations; can be (offenders can equipment must used to identify conceal goods be adequate to offenders after the elsewhere, such keeping close watch act and/or provide as around blind on suspicious evidence for charges corners, in elevators, individuals; staff and in stairwells) watching monitors quickly become fatigued 11 31 Using electronic Detects shoplifters …the tags are Staff may become article surveillance trying to leave store difficult to remove complacent about with concealed without damaging other antitheft goods goods policies and procedures; not all merchandise can be easily tagged; an expensive option, but source tagging will reduce costs | 39 | Shoplifting, 2nd Edition

Response Page Response How It Works Works Best If… Considerations No. No. 12 32 Attaching ink tags to Removes the rewards …combined with Not all merchandise merchandise of shoplifting by electronic article can be easily tagged; rendering stolen surveillance ink tag security can goods unusable be compromised by theft of tag-removal equipment 13 32 Using advanced Advanced software …early warnings May be expensive to surveillance programs appended are attended to at obtain or maintain electronic systems to surveillance once by monitoring systems allow for centers or security immediate detection personnel of unusual activity For Organized Shoplifting 14 33 Establishing early Eliminates element …systems are A low-cost, sensible warning systems of surprise that operated by stores precaution for organized shoplifting whose merchandise stores vulnerable to groups often rely on is targeted by organized shoplifting organized shoplifters 15 33 Forming task Enhances police …large organized Law enforcement forces with other intelligence about criminal groups are priorities may vary law enforcement shoplifting incidents involved across jurisdictions, agencies and groups which may affect outcome of investigations 16 33 Forming Enhances shoplifting …retailers express Roles and functions partnerships and intelligence willingness to work should be established working with and improves closely with law to avoid confusion retailers and theft prevention enforcement manufacturers and offender apprehension

| 40 | Appendix

Response Page Response How It Works Works Best If… Considerations No. No. 17 34 Monitoring stores’ Reduces retailers’ …suppliers’ premises Loss prevention goods suppliers risk of purchasing are regularly teams and buyers goods previously inspected by loss need to be trained stolen by organized prevention teams and be given shoplifters and and store buyers incentives to identify therefore disrupts are encouraged to and report suspect market in these watch for suspicious goods and irregular goods transactions transactions 18 35 Using social Enhances police …monitoring helps Can be resource and networking sites to intelligence about identify and prevent time consuming and gather information shoplifting incidents future incidents may not always yield about shoplifting and groups useful intelligence incidents Responses with Limited Effectiveness 19 35 Hiring store Deters offenders, …the stores are May not be an detectives especially casual large, so that effective deterrent to shoplifters detectives’ identity more determined or does not become organized shoplifters known, and who can spot store detectives spend detectives considerable time on shop floor 20 35 Arresting and Punishment deters …the chances of Risks of getting prosecuting shoplifters from getting caught for caught are so low shoplifters offending again and shoplifting are that shoplifters pay deters other people perceived to be high little attention to from shoplifting possible costs 21 36 Using shaming First-time offenders …the sanction is Uncertain punishments for learn how and why combined with effectiveness; may first-time offenders not to repeat their some other informal be more effective behavior sanction if used with young offenders

| 41 | Shoplifting, 2nd Edition

Response Page Response How It Works Works Best If… Considerations No. No. 22 36 Banning known Denies known …the identities May have some shoplifters shoplifters of those who have value in deterring opportunity to steal been convicted shoplifting, but of shoplifting are unless those publicized identified have been convicted by a court, both merchants and police are vulnerable to legal challenge or public criticism 23 36 Launching public Informs public …used to advertise Little evidence exists information about shoplifting new anti-shoplifting that these campaigns campaigns harms; encourages measures reduce shoplifting, people to report but they might shoplifting; increases change community knowledge about attitudes penalties

| 42 | References

References Bamfield, Joshua. 1997. Making Shoplifters Pay. London: The Social Market Foundation. ———. 1998. “Retail Civil Recovery: Filling a Deficit in the Criminal Justice System?” International Journal of Risk, Security and Crime Prevention 3(4): 257–267. Beck, Adrian. 2011. “Self-Scan Checkouts and Retail Loss: Understanding the Risk and Minimizing the Threat.” Security Journal 24(3): 199-215. Beck, Adrian, and Andrew Willis. 1999. “Context-Specific Measures of CCTV Effectiveness in the Retail Sector.” In Surveillance of Public Space: CCTV, Street Lighting and Crime Prevention, ed. Kate Painter and Nick Tilley. Crime Prevention Studies, Vol. 10. Monsey, New York: Criminal Justice Press: 251–269. Better Business Bureau of WNY, Inc. 1993. “Stop Shoplifting Education Program.” Annual Report. Buffalo, New York: Better Business Bureau of WNY, Inc. Boise Police Department. 2012. “Organized Retail Crime Interdiction: A Partnership that Works.” Submission for the Herman Goldstein Award for Excellence in Problem- Oriented Policing. Buckle, Abigail, David P. Farrington, John Burrows, Martin Speed, and Tony Burns- Howell. 1992. “Measuring Shoplifting by Repeated Systematic Counting.” Security Journal 3(3): 137–146. Budden, Michael C. 1999. Preventing Shoplifting Without Being Sued: Practical Advice for Retail Executives. Westport, Connecticut: Quorum Books. Burrows, John. 1988. Retail Crime: Prevention Through Crime Analysis. Crime Prevention Unit, Paper 11. London: Home Office Crime Prevention Unit. Cardone, Caroline A. 2006. Opportunity Makes the Thief: Analysis of the Physical Cues that Influence Shoplifter Perceptions of the Retail Interior and the Decision to Steal. Master’s Thesis. University of Florida. Carmel-Gilfilen, Candy. 2011. “Advancing Retail Security Design: Uncovering Shoplifter Perceptions of the Physical Environment.” Journal of Interior Design 36(2): 21–38.

| 43 | Shoplifting, 2nd Edition

Charlotte-Mecklenburg Police Department. 2003. “The Home Depot Project.” Submission for the Herman Goldstein Award for Excellence in Problem-Oriented Policing. Clarke, Ronald V. 1999. Hot Products: Understanding, Anticipating and Reducing the Demand for Stolen Goods. Police Research Series, Paper 112. London: Home Office. Colorado Springs Police Department. 2009. “Pikes Peak Retail Security Association: Decreasing the Level of Shoplifting Citywide.” Submission for the Herman Goldstein Award for Excellence in Problem-Oriented Policing. Dabney, Dean A., Richard C. Hollinger, and Laura Dugan. 2004. “Who Actually Steals? A Study of Covertly Observed Shoplifters.” Justice Quarterly 21(4): 693–728. DiLonardo, Robert L. 1996. “Defining and Measuring the Economic Benefit of Electronic Article Surveillance.” Security Journal 7(1): 3–9. DiLonardo, Robert L., and Ronald V. Clarke. 1996. “Reducing the Rewards of Shoplifting: An Evaluation of Ink Tags.” Security Journal 7(1): 11–14. Dyball, Matthew. 2008. “Using Hot Product Controllers to Manage Shrink: A South Africa Case Study.” Loss Prevention Magazine 7(6): 70-73. Ekblom, Paul. 1986. The Prevention of Shop Theft: An Approach Through Crime Analysis. Crime Prevention Unit, Paper 5. London: Home Office Crime Prevention Unit. Farrington, David P. 1999. “Measuring, Explaining and Preventing Shoplifting: A Review of British Research.” Security Journal 12(1): 9–27. Farrington, David P., Sean Bowen, Abigail Buckle, Tony Burns-Howell, John Burrows, and Martin Speed. 1993. “An Experiment on the Prevention of Shoplifting.” In Crime Prevention Studies, Vol. 1, ed. Ronald V. Clarke. Monsey, New York: Criminal Justice Press: 93–119. Finklea, Kristin M. 2012. Organized Retail Crime. CRS Report to Congress. Washington, D.C.: Congressional Research Service. Hampshire Constabulary (U.K.). 2007. “Operation Kensington: Bringing the Business Community and the Police Together.” Submission for the Herman Goldstein Award for Excellence in Problem-Oriented Policing. Handford, Matthew. 1994. “Electronic Tagging in Action: A Case Study in Retailing.” Crime at Work: Studies in Security and Crime Prevention, Vol. 1, ed. Martin Gill. Leicester, England: Perpetuity Press: 174–184. Hayes, Read. 2005. Organized Retail Crime: Describing a Major Problem. Tallahassee, Florida: Loss Prevention Research Council, University of Florida. | 44 | References

———. 1997. “Retail Theft: An Analysis of Apprehended Shoplifters.” Security Journal 8(3): 233–246. Hobson, Katherine. 2001. “Hey, Security Tag Makers: You’re It.” U.S. News & World Report, May 14, p. 34. Klemke, Lloyd W. 1992. The Sociology of Shoplifting: Boosters and Snitches Today. Westport, Connecticut: Praeger Publishers. McCulloch, Helen. 1996. Shop Theft: Improving the Police Response. Crime Detection and Prevention Series, Paper 76. London: Home Office. Miller, Charles. 2005. Organized Retail Theft: Raising Awareness, Offering Solutions. Washington, D.C.: National Retail Foundation. National Retail Foundation. 2011. Organized Retail Crime Survey, 2010. Washington, D.C.: National Retail Foundation. Palmer, Walter E., and Chris Richardson. 2009. Organized Retail Crime: Assessing the Risk and Developing Effective Strategies. An ASIS Foundation Research Council CRISP Report. Alexandria, Virginia: American Society for Industrial Security Foundation, Inc. Parks, Liz. 2008. “Uniting Against ORC: LP Execs Work with Each Other, Law Enforcement and Legislatures to Battle Crime.” Stores Magazine (May): 12. ———. 2007. “Keeping a Watchful Eye.” Supermarket News, 55(43): 12. Rafacz, Sharlet D., Thomas E. Boyce, and W. Larry Williams. 2011. “Examining the Effects of a Low-Cost Prompt to Reduce Retail Theft.” Journal of Organizational Behavior Management 31(2): 150–160. Retail Industry Leaders Association (2011). Crime Trends and Leading Practices Survey. October, 2011. Sacco, Vincent F. 1985. “Shoplifting Prevention: The Role of Communication-Based Intervention Strategies.” Canadian Journal of Criminology 27(1): 15–29. Sherman, Lawrence W., and Patrick R. Gartin. 1986. Differential Recidivism: A Field Experiment on the Specific Sanction Effects of Arrest for Shoplifting. Washington, D.C.: Crime Control Institute. Talamo, John. 2007. “Organized Retail Crime: Executing the ORC Strategy.” Loss Prevention Magazine 7(1): 58.

| 45 | Shoplifting, 2nd Edition

U.S. Government Accountability Office. 2011. Organized Retail Crime: Private Sector and Law Enforcement Collaborate to Deter and Investigate Theft. GAO-11-685. Report to the Ranking Member, Subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism, and Homeland Security, Committee on the Judiciary, House of Representatives. Washington, D.C.: Government Accountability Office. U.S. House of Representatives. 2005. Committee on the Judiciary. Subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism, and Homeland Security. Responding to Organized Crime Against Manufacturers and Retailers: Hearing Before the Subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism, and Homeland Security of the Committee on the Judiciary House of Representatives. 109th Congress, 1st sess. March 17. Virgillo, Amber. 2012. “Are Retailers to Blame?” LP Magazine (July-August). Woyke, Elizabeth. 2006. “Attention, Shoplifters: With $30 Billion in Theft, There’s a Revolution in Surveillance Systems.” Business Week Magazine September 11. Wyld, David C., and Michael C. Budden. 2009. “Upping the Ante: Using RFID as a Competitive Weapon to Fight Shoplifting and Improve Business Intelligence.” The International Journal of Managing Information Technology 1(1): 1–10.

| 46 | Endnotes

Endnotes 1. Farrington (1999). 2. Dabney, Hollinger, and Dugan (2004). 3. U.S. House of Representatives (2005). 4. Palmer and Richardson (2009). 5. National Retail Foundation (2011). 6. National Retail Foundation (2011). 7. Miller (2005). 8. Hayes (2005). 9. Clarke (1999). 10. Ekblom (1986). 11. Hayes (1997). 12. Hayes (1997). 13. Beck (2011). 14. Ekblom (1986). 15. Cardone (2006). 16. Carmel-Gilfilen (2011). 17. Parks (2008). 18. Hayes (2005). 19. Talamo (2007). 20. Farrington (1999). 21. Rafacz, Boyce, and Williams (2011). 22. Farrington (1999). 23. U.S. Government Accountability Office (2011). 24. Dyball (2008). 25. Bamfield (1998); Budden (1999). 26. McCulloch (1996).

| 47 | Shoplifting, 2nd Edition

27. Beck and Willis (1999). 28. Beck and Willis (1999). 29. Hobson (2001). 30. Farrington et al. (1993); Handford (1994); DiLonardo (1996). 31. DiLonardo (1996). 32. DiLonardo and Clarke (1996). 33. Woyke (2006). 34. Parks (2007). 35. Woyke (2006). 36. Wyld and Budden (2009). 37. Finklea (2012). 38. Miller (2005). 39. Charlotte-Mecklenburg Police Department (2003). 40. Colorado Springs Police Department (2009). 41. Hampshire Constabulary (2007). 42. Boise Police Department (2012). 43. Palmer and Richardson (2009). 44. U.S. Government Accountability Office (2011). 45. Virgillo (2012). 46. Retail Industry Leaders Association (2011). 47. Burrows (1988). 48. Ekblom (1986). 49. Bamfield (1997); Burrows (1988). 50. Klemke (1992). 51. Sacco (1985).

| 48 | About the Authors

About the Authors Ronald V. Clarke Ronald V. Clarke is a professor at the School of Criminal Justice, Rutgers University. He previously headed the British government’s criminological research department, where he had a significant role in developing situational crime prevention and the British Crime Survey. Clarke is the founding editor of Crime Prevention Studies, and his publications include Designing Out Crime (HMSO 1980), The Reasoning Criminal (Springer-Verlag 1986), Business and Crime Prevention (Criminal Justice Press 1997), and Situational Crime Prevention: Successful Case Studies (Harrow and Heston 1997). Together with Herman Goldstein, he has recently been working on problem-oriented policing projects for the Charlotte-Mecklenburg (North Carolina) Police Department. Since 1998, he has chaired the selection committee for the annual Herman Goldstein Award for Excellence in Problem-Oriented Policing. Clarke holds a doctorate in psychology from the University of London.

Gohar Petrossian Gohar Petrossian is an assistant professor at John Jay College of Criminal Justice. She is the author of Export of Stolen Vehicles Across Land Borders (Problem-Specific Guide No. 63, with Ronald V. Clarke), and scholarly articles published in Journal of Experimental Criminology and Security Journal. Petrossian holds a doctorate in criminal justice from the School of Criminal Justice, Rutgers University-Newark, and a master’s in criminal law and procedure from John Jay College of Criminal Justice.

| 49 |

Other Problem-Oriented Guides for Police

Other Problem-Oriented Guides for Police Problem-Specific Guides Series: 1. Assaults in and Around Bars, 2nd Edition. Michael S. Scott and Kelly Dedel. 2006. ISBN: 1-932582-00-2 2. Street Prostitution, 2nd Edition. Michael S. Scott and Kelly Dedel. 2006. ISBN: 1-932582-01-0 3. Speeding in Residential Areas, 2nd Edition. Michael S. Scott with David K. Maddox. 2010. ISBN: 978-1-935676-02-7 4. Drug Dealing in Privately Owned Apartment Complexes. Rana Sampson. 2001. ISBN: 1-932582-03-7 5. False Burglar Alarms, 2nd Edition. Rana Sampson. 2007. ISBN: 1-932582-04-5 6. Disorderly Youth in Public Places. Michael S. Scott. 2001. ISBN: 1-932582-05-3 7. Loud Car Stereos. Michael S. Scott. 2001. ISBN: 1-932582-06-1 8. Robbery at Automated Teller Machines. Michael S. Scott. 2001. ISBN: 1-932582-07-X 9. Graffiti. Deborah Lamm Weisel. 2002. ISBN: 1-932582-08-8 10. Thefts of and From Cars in Parking Facilities. Ronald V. Clarke. 2002. ISBN: 1-932582-09-6 11. Shoplifting, 2nd Edition. Ronald V. Clarke. 2013. ISBN: 978-1-932582-34-5 12. Bullying in Schools. Rana Sampson. 2002. ISBN: 1-932582-11-8 13. Panhandling. Michael S. Scott. 2002. ISBN: 1-932582-12-6 14. Rave Parties. Michael S. Scott. 2002. ISBN: 1-932582-13-4 15. Burglary of Retail Establishments. Ronald V. Clarke. 2002. ISBN: 1-932582-14-2 16. Clandestine Methamphetamine Labs, 2nd Edition. Michael S. Scott and Kelly Dedel. 2006. ISBN: 1-932582-15-0 17. Acquaintance Rape of College Students. Rana Sampson. 2002. ISBN: 1-932582-16-9 18. Burglary of Single-Family Houses. Deborah Lamm Weisel. 2002. ISBN: 1-932582-17-7 19. Misuse and Abuse of 911. Rana Sampson. 2002. ISBN: 1-932582-18-5 20. Financial Crimes Against the Elderly. Kelly Dedel Johnson. 2003. ISBN: 1-932582-22-3 21. Check and Card Fraud. Graeme R. Newman. 2003. ISBN: 1-932582-27-4 22. Stalking. The National Center for Victims of Crime. 2004. ISBN: 1-932582-30-4 23. Gun Violence Among Serious Young Offenders. Anthony A. Braga. 2004. ISBN: 1-932582-31-2

| 51 | Shoplifting, 2nd Edition

24. Prescription Drug Fraud and Misuse, 2nd Edition. Julie Wartell and Nancy G. La Vigne. 2013. ISBN: 978-1-932582-37-6 25. Identity Theft. Graeme R. Newman. 2004. ISBN: 1-932582-35-3 26. Crimes Against Tourists. Ronald W. Glensor and Kenneth J. Peak. 2004. ISBN: 1-932582-36-3 27. Underage Drinking. Kelly Dedel Johnson. 2004. ISBN: 1-932582-39-8 28. Street Racing. Kenneth J. Peak and Ronald W. Glensor. 2004. ISBN: 1-932582-42-8 29. Cruising. Kenneth J. Peak and Ronald W. Glensor. 2004. ISBN: 1-932582-43-6 30. Disorder at Budget Motels. Karin Schmerler. 2005. ISBN: 1-932582-41-X 31. Drug Dealing in Open-Air Markets. Alex Harocopos and Mike Hough. 2005. ISBN: 1-932582-45-2 32. Bomb Threats in Schools. Graeme R. Newman. 2005. ISBN: 1-932582-46-0 33. Illicit Sexual Activity in Public Places. Kelly Dedel Johnson. 2005. ISBN: 1-932582-47-9 34. Robbery of Taxi Drivers. Martha J. Smith. 2005. ISBN: 1-932582-50-9 35. School Vandalism and Break-Ins. Kelly Dedel Johnson. 2005. ISBN: 1-9325802-51-7 36. Drunk Driving. Michael S. Scott, Nina J. Emerson, Louis B. Antonacci, and Joel B. Plant. 2006. ISBN: 1-932582-57-6 37. Juvenile Runaways. Kelly Dedel. 2006. ISBN: 1932582-56-8 38. The Exploitation of Trafficked Women. Graeme R. Newman. 2006. ISBN: 1-932582-59-2 39. Student Party Riots. Tamara D. Madensen and John E. Eck. 2006. ISBN: 1-932582-60-6 40. People with Mental Illness. Gary Cordner. 2006. ISBN: 1-932582-63-0 41. Child Pornography on the Internet. Richard Wortley and Stephen Smallbone. 2006. ISBN: 1-932582-65-7 42. Witness Intimidation. Kelly Dedel. 2006. ISBN: 1-932582-67-3 43. Burglary at Single-Family House Construction Sites. Rachel Boba and Roberto Santos. 2006. ISBN: 1-932582-00-2 44. Disorder at Day Laborer Sites. Rob T. Guerette. 2007. ISBN: 1-932582-72-X 45. Domestic Violence. Rana Sampson. 2007. ISBN: 1-932582-74-6 46. Thefts of and from Cars on Residential Streets and Driveways. Todd Keister. 2007. ISBN: 1-932582-76-2 47. Drive-By Shootings. Kelly Dedel. 2007. ISBN: 1-932582-77-0 48. Bank Robbery. Deborah Lamm Weisel. 2007. ISBN: 1-932582-78-9 49. Robbery of Convenience Stores. Alicia Altizio and Diana York. 2007. ISBN: 1-932582-79-7 | 52 | Other Problem-Oriented Guides for Police

50. Traffic Congestion Around Schools. Nancy G. La Vigne. 2007. ISBN: 1-932582-82-7 51. Pedestrian Injuries and Fatalities. Justin A. Heinonen and John E. Eck. 2007. ISBN: 1-932582-83-5 52. Bicycle Theft. Shane D. Johnson, Aiden Sidebottom, and Adam Thorpe. 2008. ISBN: 1-932582-87-8 53. Abandoned Vehicles. Michael G. Maxfield. 2008. ISBN: 1-932582-88-6 54. Spectator Violence in Stadiums. Tamara D. Madensen and John E. Eck. 2008. ISBN: 1-932582-89-4 55. Child Abuse and Neglect in the Home. Kelly Dedel. 2010. ISBN: 978-1-935676-00-3 56. Homeless Encampments. Sharon Chamard. 2010. ISBN: 978-1-935676-01-0 57. Stolen Goods Markets. Michael Sutton. 2010. ISBN: 978-1-935676-09-6 58. Theft of Scrap Metal. Brandon R. Kooi. 2010. ISBN: 978-1-935676-12-6 59. Street Robbery. Khadija M. Monk, Justin A. Heinonen, and John E. Eck. 2010. ISBN: 978-1-935676-13-3 60. Theft of Customers’ Personal Property in Cafés and Bars. Shane D. Johnson, Kate J. Bowers, Lorraine Gamman, Loreen Mamerow, and Anna Warne. 2010. ISBN: 978-1-935676-15-7 61. Aggressive Driving. Colleen Laing. 2010. ISBN: 978-1-935676-18-8 62. Sexual Assault of Women by Strangers. Kelly Dedel. 2011. ISBN: 978-1-935676-43-0 63. Export of Stolen Vehicles Across Land Borders. Gohar Petrossian and Ronald V. Clarke. 2012. ISBN: 978-1-935676-59-1 64. Abandoned Buildings and Lots. Jon M. Shane. 2012. ISBN: 978-1-932582-01-7 65. Animal Cruelty. Kelly Dedel. 2012. ISBN: 978-1-932582-05-5 66. Missing Persons. Kenna Quinet. 2012. ISBN: 978-1-932582-20-8 67. Gasoline Drive-Offs. Bruno Meini and Ronald V. Clarke. 2012. ISBN: 978-1-932582-15-4 68. Chronic Public Inebriation. Matthew Pate. 2012. ISBN: 978-1-932582-07-9 69. Drug-Impaired Driving. Joe Kuhns. 2012. ISBN: 978-1-932582-08-6 70. Home Invasion Robbery. Justin A. Heinonen and John E. Eck. 2013. ISBN: 978-1-932582-16-1 71. Physical and Emotional Abuse of the Elderly. Brian K. Payne. 2013. ISBN: 978-1-932582-67-3 72. Hate Crimes. Joshua D. Freilich and Steven M. Cherma. 2013. ISBN: 978-1-932582-78-9

| 53 | Shoplifting, 2nd Edition

Response Guides Series: 1. The Benefits and Consequences of Police Crackdowns. Michael S. Scott. 2003. ISBN: 1-932582-24-X 2. Closing Streets and Alleys to Reduce Crime: Should You Go Down This Road? Ronald V. Clarke. 2004. ISBN: 1-932582-41-X 3. Shifting and Sharing Responsibility for Public Safety Problems. Michael S. Scott and Herman Goldstein. 2005. ISBN: 1-932582-55-X 4. Video Surveillance of Public Places. Jerry Ratcliffe. 2006. ISBN: 1-932582-58-4 5. Crime Prevention Publicity Campaigns. Emmanuel Barthe. 2006. ISBN: 1-932582-66-5 6. Sting Operations. Graeme R. Newman with assistance of Kelly Socia. 2007. ISBN: 1-932582-84-3 7. Asset Forfeiture. John L. Worall. 2008. ISBN: 1-932582-90-8 8. Improving Street Lighting to Reduce Crime in Residential Areas. Ronald V. Clarke. 2008. ISBN: 1-932582-91-6 9. Dealing With Crime and Disorder in Urban Parks. Jim Hilborn. 2009. ISBN: 1-932582-92-4 10. Assigning Police Officers to Schools. Barbara Raymond. 2010. ISBN: 978-1-935676-14-0

Problem-Solving Tools Series: 1. Assessing Responses to Problems: An Introductory Guide for Police Problem- Solvers. John E. Eck. 2002. ISBN: 1-932582-19-3 2. Researching a Problem. Ronald V. Clarke and Phyllis A. Schultze. 2005. ISBN: 1-932582-48-7 3. Using Offender Interviews to Inform Police Problem-Solving. Scott H. Decker. 2005. ISBN: 1-932582-49-5 4. Analyzing Repeat Victimization. Deborah Lamm Weisel. 2005. ISBN: 1-932582-54-1 5. Partnering with Businesses to Address Public Safety Problems. Sharon Chamard. 2006. ISBN: 1-932582-62-2 6. Understanding Risky Facilities. Ronald V. Clarke and John E. Eck. 2007. ISBN: 1-932582-75-4 7. Implementing Responses to Problems. Rick Brown and Michael S. Scott. 2007. ISBN: 1-932582-80-0 8. Using Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design in Problem-Solving. Diane Zahm. 2007. ISBN: 1-932582-81-9

| 54 | Other Problem-Oriented Guides for Police

9. Enhancing the Problem-Solving Capacity of Crime Analysis Units. Matthew B. White. 2008. ISBN: 1-932582-85-1 10. Analyzing Crime Displacement and Diffusion. Rob T. Guerette. 2009. ISBN: 1-932582-93-2 11. Analyzing and Responding to Repeat Offending. Nick Tilley. 2013. ISBN: 978-1-932582-71-1 12. Understanding the Theft of ‘Hot Products’. Kate J. Bowers and Shane D. Johnson. 2013. ISBN: 978-1-932582-77-2

Special Publications: Crime Analysis for Problem Solvers in 60 Small Steps. Ronald V. Clarke and John E. Eck. 2005. ISBN:1-932582-52-5 Policing Terrorism: An Executive’s Guide. Graeme R. Newman and Ronald V. Clarke. 2008. Effective Policing and Crime Prevention: A Problem-Oriented Guide for Mayors, City Managers, and County Executives. Joel B. Plant and Michael S. Scott. 2009. Problem-Oriented Policing Implementation Manual. Michael S. Scott and Stuart Kirby. 2012. ISBN: 978-1-932582-61-1

Intelligence Analysis for Problem Solvers. John E. Eck and Ronald V. Clarke. 2013. ISBN: 978-1-935676-55-3

| 55 | Shoplifting, 2nd Edition

Upcoming Problem-Oriented Guides for Police Problem-Specific Guides Robbery of Pharmacies Problem-Solving Tools Identifying and Defining Policing Problems Response Guides Monitoring Offenders on Conditional Release Using Civil Actions Against Property to Control Crime Problems

For a complete and up-to-date listing of all available POP Guides, see the Center for Problem-Oriented Policing website at www.popcenter.org. For more information about the Problem-Oriented Guides for Police series and other COPS Office publications, call the COPS Office Response Center at 800-421-6770, via e-mail at [email protected], or visit COPS Online at www.cops.usdoj.gov.

| 56 | Center for Problem-Oriented Policing

Got a Problem? We’ve got answers! Log onto the Center for Problem-Oriented Policing website at www.popcenter.org for a wealth of information to help you deal more effectively with crime and disorder in your community, including: • Recommended readings in problem-oriented policing and situational crime prevention • A complete listing of other POP Guides • A listing of forthcoming POP Guides Designed for police and those who work with them to address community problems, www.popcenter.org is a great resource for problem-oriented policing. Sponsored by the U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Community Oriented Policing Services (COPS Office). Shoplifting, 2nd Edition reviews ways to reduce shoplifting, a common crime that affects large and small retailers alike. The guide summarizes what is known about the main offender groups involved in shoplifting, reviews the police role in dealing with shoplifting, reviews factors that increase shoplifting risks, lists questions to help police analyze local shoplifting problems, and reviews responses to the problem, and what is known about them from research and police practice.

Office of Community Oriented Policing Services 145 N Street, N.E. Washington, DC 20530

To obtain details on COPS Office programs, call the COPS Office Response Center at 800-421-6770. Scan this QR code with your smartphone for more information Visit COPS Online at www.cops.usdoj.gov. about the POP Guides Series, or visit www.popcenter.org. April 2013 ISBN: 978-1-932582-34-5 e051222475